Local authorities and the NHS are missing a trick when it comes to meeting the housing and care needs of the baby-boomer generation. It's not all about building more bungalows
We know we have a rapidly ageing population. The number of over 85s in the UK is predicted to double in the next 20 years and by 2083 about one in three people in the UK will be over 60.
But most local authorities are missing a trick when it comes to housing for older people. By not sufficiently including housing for them in local planning, we are wasting an opportunity to massively reduce the burden on the public purse.
This is not yet another ‘invest to save’ model, where investment is required from local authorities or public bodies for savings to (hopefully) materialise some way down the line. Many older people would be willing and able to fund the purchase of more appropriate housing themselves – if proper options were available.
The new planning minister, Brandon Lewis, recently suggested that the best way to tackle the housing issue for older people is to build more bungalows. This is an unrealistic proposition for urban areas and for most of the South East, as they require a lot of land, and more importantly, they do not begin to solve the imminent care needs of the baby boomer generation.
The housing with care model (otherwise known as extra care or retirement communities and villages) allows older people to live in a community setting, with their own front door and care available on site if needed. These homes for rent or purchase mean older people can move in when they are relatively young, fit and healthy, establish friends and social connections, and live at home even if they need more care.
Domiciliary services and nurses are based on site, allowing time with those who need it, and ending the complex juggling act that leads to problems like 15-minute care visits.
Retirement communities reduce hospital admissions by helping to avoid falls and other preventable health related issues such as infections or dehydration. This is prevention paid for by older people themselves, as they want to remain healthy, fit and active for as long as possible in communities where they can maintain independence, make friends and live well.
The International Longevity Centre found that older people living in extra care spend 4.8 nights a year in hospital, compared to 5.8 nights for a similar sample living in their own home. In 2012-13, patients spent 833,000 days longer in hospital than necessary because of delayed transfers, time that could be massively reduced if convalescent care was delivered in a private home, but one that is already fully adapted to individual needs.
But in an extraordinary oversight, councils frequently resist applications for specialist housing, and retirement communities in particular, because they believe such schemes bring additional older people to an area, increasing their health and social care bill. However, recent research suggests that most residents come from within a 2-5 mile radius so where retirement communities exist they are generally being populated with local people.
There is demand for down-sizer homes from older people themselves. A recent Demos report suggested that a third of over-60s would like to move to a smaller property if there was somewhere suitable to move to, and there is clear call for housing with care schemes. But current supply is woefully short, with only one appropriate flat for every 200 people over 65. It will be difficult to even maintain this level without building more retirement communities.
Besides the measurable benefits and outcomes there are other important benefits to residents. Couples can stay together in spite of varying care needs and residents are less likely to experience loneliness.
There is an out-dated view among some planners and local authorities that retirement communities are gated, segregated complexes for wealthy older people.
Birmingham City Council is an example of an area embracing the potential of housing with care. The Pannel Croft Village attracts most residents from within a one-mile radius, and has a diverse resident base. 70% of the residents come from the African Caribbean community and the next largest group are Irish residents. The Village provides 180 affordable homes (80% rented 20% shared ownership) and 18 health and social facilities. The village has a huge range of activities that involve the wider local community of all age groups such as computer classes, movie nights, gym activities, arts and crafts, karaoke, and seaside trips.
Many retirement villages and communities have restaurants, swimming pools, gyms and cafes on site – and provide a lifestyle that is far from clinical or institutional. The market has developed to offer retirees a product they want, and a lifestyle that takes them from healthy retirement to – if need be - the care and support stage all the while staying in a familiar and socially connected community.
Until local authorities and their NHS colleagues see the benefits of housing with care and actively encourage more retirement communities to be built, they will continue scratching their heads about how to save money as their elderly population booms. By all means build bungalows, but creating integrated approaches to housing and care is the key to ensuring healthy figures for older people themselves and town hall budgets.
Michael Voges is executive director of Associated Retirement Community Operators. ARCO runs the Help to Move campaign
